“The PPP has lost state power and could only mobilise less than 400 people to attend its celebration.” Foroyaa
The APRC and PPP have both celebrated the 50th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The APRC controls state power and could mobilise tens of thousands of people to its ceremonies. The PPP has lost state power and could only mobilise less than 400 people to attend its celebration. When PPP held state power it could also pull
thousands to the stadium. If APRC existed as an opposition Party it may have been able to pull only a crowd of 400.
It is therefore important for all Gambians to take a fresh look at the 50th Anniversary as a historical event which requires study and analysis in order to draw lessons for the future. Scholars should take the debate from the political platform and organise symposia to properly interrogate the past for posterity.
The old political landscape makes ruling parties dominant in every respect because of the lack of political awareness of the citizenry. The changing political landscape calls for the raising of the awareness of the people so that they could think critical and make informed choice despite the power of the state. Power is borrowed by leaders from the people. Hence its retention is not permanent.
The past is gone. The present will become the past. And the future will come. This is inevitable. We must therefore prepare for the Third Republic. We must learn from the past to shape the future and not live in it.
Source: Foroyaa http://www.foroyaa.gm/archives/4490
Ends
Why can’t pdois be just bothered about their own crowd and leave other parties with their crowds alone. Have they ever heard of the word bigotry?? Well this is it. I hope they are proud of themselves.
Thanks
Calm down, Lafia….And stop “cherry picking” to suit your narrative…Show us how this piece constitute “bigotry” and “arrogance”…
Anyone who reads this piece without preconceived prejudices can clearly see the true inference of the numbers about both the PPP and APRC, within the context of Gambian politics….
In fact, it will become abundantly clear, that this is neither arrogance, nor bigotry, if you cared to read the whole of it…Here’s how..
Quote (1)….”The APRC controls state power and could mobilise tens of thousands of people to its ceremonies….”
Quote (2)…”The PPP has lost state power and could only mobilise less than 400 people to attend its celebration…”
Quote (3)…”When PPP held state power it could also pull thousands to the stadium… ”
Quote (4)…”If APRC existed as an opposition Party it may have been able to pull only a crowd of 400….”
Quote ( 5 )…. “The old political landscape makes ruling parties dominant in every respect because of the lack of political awareness of the citizenry.”
Comment… .Do you need any further explanation ?…Isn’t it obvious that what Foroyaa is pointing out is that INCUMBENCY (being in government) is a massive pull factor in Gambian politics….
Isn’t it true that the PPP, during their days in government, could easily fill the stadium..Today, they can hardly fill a village Bantaba….How.does stating this FACT constitute “arrogance” and “bigotry” ? Is it so because it came from PDOIS/Foroyaa…?
Going by this historical fact, isn’t it reasonable to assume that the APRC, once out of power and provided they survive as a party, will also struggle to fill a village Bantaba….
What is arrogant about these facts/ reasonable assumptions..? Where is the bigotry you charged..? Show us Lafia…
PPP has lost state power and could only mobilise less than 400 , Question : how many voters did you mobilise in 29 years of your existence ? and is these low turnout of political rally’s in the Gambia today are due to political awareness, or fear of consequence? by the way what’s your excuse this time to show the solidary to you fellow citizens? was because of their number, was because of their political and ideological ignorance?
Arrogance is in everything you write. It is in your gestures, but arrogance does not have senses.
It has only a sharp tongue and the pointing finger,
PDOIS’s arrogance is breathe taking. It really is.
Thanks
How is this arrogance…? How does stating a simple fact, that the PPP could not mobilise as many people now as they could when they were in government, constitute arrogance..?
How about an independent political party being told by the leader of another independent political party, what they could or could not put in their press release..?
Which of the above actions constitute arrogance, if you know what “arrogance” means…?
How I wished the (party loyalists advocates) would at least this time learn the lesson and the basic message of the editorial which is “Citizenry empowerment and awareness”.
PDOIS’s numbers and indeed every other party’s is insignificant as long as the citizens remain subjects of state and ruling party manipulation and not empowered to make sovereign enlightened decisions.
The emphasis of the editorial is that “our noble and much cherished pride in independence would remain meaningless and a far fetched illusion as long as the Gambian citizens remain tramped under the manipulative feet of the ruling parties.
PPP’s 30 yrs of political domination vanished and so would the APRC’s. Hence no one stands to gain but rather all lose as long as the total emancipation of the citizenry remains only one party’s priority.
This is the truth and the only truth.
Gambia : To call me a party loyalist is a clear indication that you have no slightest idea about me, Unlike you and your party loyalists, I am for all inclusive united front, For me Gambia comes first and then any individual or party . I am saddens that every time genuine effort are made , no matter who’s idea it’s, be it political parties , civil society groups, or individual person, we see these editorial colorful languages writing by these so-call intellectuals printing all over the front page of Foroyaa. Telling us to go back to the drawing board, or register for PDOIS political awareness class. We want deeper sincerity of motive, not the other way around ..
How I wished the (party loyalists advocates) would at least this time learn the lesson and the basic message of the editorial which is “Citizenry empowerment and awareness”.
PDOIS’s numbers and indeed every other party’s is insignificant as long as the citizens remain subjects of state and ruling party manipulation and not empowered to make sovereign enlightened decisions.
The emphasis of the editorial is that “our noble and much cherished pride in independence would remain meaningless and a far fetched illusion as long as the Gambian citizens remain tramped under the manipulative feet of the ruling parties
PPP’s 30 yrs of political domination vanished and so would the APRC’s. Hence no one stands to gain but rather all lose as long as the total emancipation of the citizenry remains only one party’s priority.
Therefore, whoever is interested in genuine change must work towards the political awareness of the general Gambian and not just the parties and leaders. Can’t we see other countries, Nigeria just removed Bad-luck Jonathan and elect a former president.
This is the truth and the only truth.
Gambia, the opposition coalition in Nigeria is led by the biggest party, The APC, in line with international standards. They did not wait for a second round to have it happen. Perhaps we should learn something from that too and be enlightened. Pdois cannot continue to hide their ulterior motives behind some God-bothering sheer arrogance or obscurantism.
Thanks
Quote…”Gambia, the opposition coalition in Nigeria is led by the biggest party, The APC, in line with international standards. They did not wait for a second round to have it happen….”
Comment….What opposition coalition..? The APC is NOT a coalition…It’s a party created by the merger of other parties…It doesn’t fit your international standards formula….Try another one..
There is a world of difference between a coalition of parties (each maintaining their identity and independence) and a merger (where identities and independence are lost into the new entity)….
The Foroyaa editorial is unnecessary and in my mind ridiculous. Even after 20 years of Jammeh rule, recently described as the North Korea of Africa, yet this author thinks it fitting to put it in the same bracket with PPP. Nobody can tell me as I lived through both regimes as well as worked under them. We do not even have to go into the nitty-gritty of the two governance regimes, but we have to recall the saying, ‘you reap what you sow.’ The PPP regime’s crowd was built through democracy and very much the will of the people. The AFPRC/APRC by the barrel of the gun. Strange that the editorial writer failed to recall this recent history.
“Gambia, the opposition coalition in Nigeria is led by the biggest party, The APC, in line with international standards.”
This statement is not true. The opposition coalition in Nigeria is not led by any bigger party. The opposition coalition parties in Nigeria created a political party, All Progressive Congress {APC) for the sole purpose of contesting the 2015 elections.
The party was formed on the 6th of February, 2013 in anticipation of the 2015 elections. It was formed by the three biggest opposition parties in Nigeria the result of an alliance between these political parties. These opposition political parties are namely : the Action Congress Of Nigeria {ACN}, the Congress For Progressive Change {CPC} and the All Nigeria Peoples Party {ANPP}. A faction of another opposition political party, the All Progressive Grand Alliance {APGA} also joined the alliance.
All these parties MERGED and created a new party, All Progressive Congress {APC} and the result is evident. An opposition political party has won against an incumbent government in Africa.
This is a winning formula. Senegal has done the same. The Nigerian Independent National Electoral Commission {INEC} approved the merger and subsequent registration of the All Progressive Congress (APC) as a political party on the 31st July 2013.
It is baffling that Lafia is still fixated on this idea of the biggest opposition party leading a coalition. Contrary to his assertion that it is in line with international standards, this proposition has no basis in either fact or law. It is a complete fallacy.
What Lafia is propagating is for other smaller opposition political parties to come to the aid of a bigger opposition political party and help that party come to power. He then turns around and say that bigger opposition political party can form a coalition government which is not sanctioned by any constitutional authority.
Get over it, Lafia, your party-led coalition agenda is not practical. You cannot form a coalition government through it as you allege.
The Gambian opposition parties have to come to their moment of truth. There is no other way around it.
They either come together in a coalition and register a political party independent of all the opposition political parties like NADD or the United Front or they go it alone or form some other alliances among themselves. The choice is there for them to make.
If there is a two term limit to the presidency and the second round of voting who would care what the opposition parties do.
In the absence of any kind of coalition with the opposition political parties, the biggest democratic gain would be to push for a constitutional amendment to institute a two term limit to the presidency and the second round of voting. This much the opposition political parties should strive to achieve before the 2016 elections. They can then all contest on their own if they choose to do. At least there will be a process in place for the peaceful transfer of power.
” They did not wait for a second round to have it happen. Perhaps we should learn something from that too and be enlightened”
You got it all wrong mate. The Nigerian opposition political parties formed a formidable political party, All Progressive Congress {APC} and they are the winners.
“Pdois cannot continue to hide their ulterior motives behind some God-bothering sheer arrogance or obscurantism.”
Where everything is clear there is nothing more to clarify. As PDOIS is vaunt to say: Deception is no longer possible.
Thanks
The APC had additional allies in 2015 and they chose to rally behind the already established candidate rather than calling for a primary.
And by the way, APC is a registered political party in Nigeria. Thus, it’s legal and political status is a political party.
Thanks
What is being pointed out to you Lafia, is that the ANPP, General Buhari’s party, which could be described as the biggest/strongest party (if we go by your criteria of votes equals size) did not insist that all other parties rally behind it and be “swallowed” by it….Nor was it accorded any special treatment to form the merger…It lost its identity, its independence and it’s operating license, just like any others in the merger…It ceased to be a political party…
The selection of Buhari is a tactical and strategic one and it worked because he won…We know that such a proposal was made by Landing Jallow Sonko, for Ousainou Darboe to lead a non partisan coalition but the UDP rejected this…
The UDP wants all to ditch their independence and rally behind it….That’s not the same as what happened in Nigeria and the question of 2nd round voting does not even.arise, as the incumbent was defeated in the 1st round…
You got to go search for another example that suits your formula…This one doesn’t, unfortunately. .
Lafia, the event in Nigeria was as a result of the opposition parties knowing who is more influential than the other. This truth is something they never argued over. But you cannot have that in the Gambia. The smaller you are, the more edge you become in bigger gatherings. Apply this to the Gambian case, UDP, NRP will have top billing whilst GMC, PDOIS, PPP and GPDP will have lesser billings. However, Whilst GMC, GPDP and PPP may agree with UDP Leader to lead such alliance, Personal standing and billing was crucial to the selection of Buhari and in today’s Gambia’s oppositions, the man with the biggest personal billing is Lawyer Darboe.
However, with the age limit affecting him, UDP will have to bring another influential personality to take the party forward. My advice to you is, let UDP members worldwide start canvassing for votes through each constituency, tap has many credible potential parliamentarians as possible, work on their finances, and engage the village to village voter to register in numbers like the Northerners did, and convince the voters not to sell their votes a day before the elections. UDP loses majorly due to voters selling votes to APRC. I know it because i was part of the vote buying.
If UDP can convince people to register, convince them to bother to go out and vote, and control the equation 2 to 3 days before the elections. They can win hands down. But that is easier said than done. The reason we need an opposition unity is to galvanise the people and encourage a national movement. Thanks
River, so the strategy has been “let’s allow age limit to catch up with Lawyer Darboe and then we can argue that there is no longer an established candidate within Udp. Therefore. Udp must submit to us in totality whether they like it or not”. I see.
Can I say though that I am absolutely amazed by the amount delusion certain people got into themselves over this coalition issues. De name larre.
Thanks
“The APC had additional allies in 2015 and they chose to rally behind the already established candidate rather than calling for a primary.”
Lafia, again you are wrong. A simple google search would have established the facts for you. General Buhari was not already an established candidate. He had to go through a primary process.
In Nigeria political parties do have primaries. Jonathan had to seek the nomination of his party, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) for his second term. He went unopposed in the primaries held by the PDP on December 10, 2014. He was thus given the nomination by his party as the presidential candidate. He officially confirmed his candidacy on November 11, 2014.
The All Progressive Congress {APC} after its formation also held a primary to choose its presidential candidate. So there was indeed a primary. The primary was held on December 10, 2014 and was won by General Buhari. There were other contestants in the primary. He defeated the Kano State Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso; former Vice President Atiku Abubakar ; IMO State Governor Rochas Okorocha and newspaper editor Sam Nda Isaiah. On December 17, 2014 the APC chose Professor Yemi Osinbajor as the running mate for General Buhari.
The above has vindicated PDOIS in its quest for a primary process to choose a presidential candidate.
You can say anything you want about the PDOIS leadership, but they are very deliberate and meticulous in identifying processes that are relevant, scientific and democratic, and they always take the time to research, study and thoroughly examine their policies and programs before they put it in the public square.
You can now see the reason why PDOIS cannot support a party-led coalition; you can also see the reason why it is necessary to build an opposition coalition with an independent political structure like NADD or a UNITED FRONT with a primary process to choose a presidential candidate to contest the 2016 elections or any other election for that matter. This is not a mere wishful thinking. The facts, the evidence, the practice and the results are all before us. We only choose not to see it blinded by our parochial and partisan considerations. What more do you people want?
“And by the way, APC is a registered political party in Nigeria. Thus, it’s legal and political status is a political party.”
I told you that the Nigerian opposition political parties created and registered the APC as a political party. The APC went through a political process and chose General Buhari as their presidential candidate. They also chose Professor Yemi Osinbajor as his running mate. The rest is now history.
Thanks
correction: the APC went through a primary process and chose General Buhari as their presidential candidate.
APC went through a primary?? Bonkers!! Send us a link please or check in into rehab.
Thanks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_general_election,_2015
This is the link mate. Now tell me who needs to go into a rehab. The problem is that you are not an objective thinker or observer. You just write and say things out of the blue. Before you write or say something verify it first. Check the link and I will get back to you. I am off to work.
Lafia, Buhari was consistently coming second in all the past 3 elections. Meaning, his party is the biggest opposition and with much bigger influence. This helped him during the opposition gathering. The process implemented to elect the alliance leader took that fact on board, meaning Nigerians want change.
Secondly, As a non-partisan Gambian, the UDP accepted NADD and even had sign up to it, thus some of their MPs losing their seats in parliament. Where the rule became ridiculous was when less influential parties want to get the same billing as the much bigger UDP. I think that was dishonest on the part of the Gambian oppositions.
Nigerians knew, Buhari had a top rating, but the incumbency favouritism affected him in the past 3 election circle. And the other opposition leaders, including the mega rich Atiku Abubacar, all accepted Buhari because with all their money, they cannot match him by influence and ratings. And in the Gambia, the open truth is, whilst Nigerians were able to bury their ethnic, regional, and other bigotry and hatred, the Gambian current opposition could not do that. NADD could have been our APC if the other opposition leaders all agree to allow the UDP leader to lead the coalition without challenge because he was without a doubt more influential than the rest.
Notwithstanding that, Darboe fell in one key thing, from the get go, he should have been firm and refuse any negotiation around ‘we are all equal’ because there is no such thing in democracy, it is a rule by numbers. The American system of primary looks at fresh faces and some old face who never contested (whilst some may have contested) from within the same party.
An opposition convention should have been held in the Gambia, where a new alliance is name, with the bigger opposition party leader heading it. Lawyer Darboe did not have any problem with that. But any discussion of primaries are futile exercise and unnecessary if the goal is to end tyranny. Thank you
Try and get your facts right, please..
Rivers, your analytical truth above here is the clearest unbiased nonpartisan one could have for our collective common good as genuine Gambians….. When all efforts & endeavours are meant to be SELFLESSLY exploited by all & any means necessary for country first, there then are the partisan jihadists hell-bent on selfish individualistic party aggrandizements at all costs first, above anything else…. How long can we afford to go on like this when all know Gambia is burning silently & just matters of time…. & above all these selfish partisan political fanatics are never ashamed to come up with all sorts of treacherous tricks & half-truths to sell the infested partisan doctrines which every honest selfless & open-minded God-fearing can see through…. God help & bless Gambia from the poisoning infested jaws of the kanilai murderous devil & the conscious & unconscious aid-abettors; Ameen.
Kamalo, this is APC ‘s own internal primary limited to its members only, which is normal and unlike what pdois is calling for in The Gambia. The APC did not contest any primary with other opposition parties to choose a candidate.
The biggest opposition party in Nigeria is APC, and the other parties who coalesced with them in 2015 accepted Buhari as the approved candidate of the biggest opposition party and therefore the legitimate candidate for any coalition involving the APC in line with international standards.
By the way; the link you sent is about the recent presidential election, not an APC primary.
Thanks
So NADD was definitely on the right side of history. The architects of that document now stand vindicated. The contents, the structure and the overall principles that govern that document truly speaks of a nation in search of its rebirth.
About Nadd;
1. The MOU that established it created an Allaince of political parties.
2. Allainces are not registerable with the I.E.C
3. Even when Nadd was a political party, it was not the biggest opposition party in the country as it trailed behind UDP in the 2006 presidential election by 5:1.
4. It only won one seat in the 2007 parliamentary elections compared to UDP’s 4. NADD therefore had no legitimacy to lead any coalition involving the UDP, which is the biggest opposition party in the country.
Thanks
ANPP no longer exist. Buhari’s only party is the APC.
Check your facts Bax. APC is not a coalition but a registered political party.
Thanks
I still cannot understand why UDP who is bragging as the biggest opposition party is sooooooo scared to go to a primary with all its voters!
Both NADD in 2006 and the United Front in 2011 called for the delegates to be proportionate to the parties’ results in the previous election. If your votes and leaders are genuine and worth the salt of a biggest party, what is preventing you from bringing 70% of the delegates to a primary to vote for your candidate? This was how Amat Bah became the flag bearer in the 2011 election.
Maybe Lafia and this Big Party Psychos would be able to enlighten the populace on this!!!
Lafia Touray la Manju
April 2, 2015 at 3:37 PM
“Kamalo, this is APC ‘s own internal primary limited to its members only, which is normal and unlike what pdois is calling for in The Gambia.”
Why do you always make things up when there is already ample clarity on the issue? Go back and revisit the whole dialogue on this issue, and if you still insist on manufacturing your own facts then I will be oblige to clarify more.
” The APC did not contest any primary with other opposition parties to choose a candidate.”
Who is talking about other opposition parties? The APC is a political party formed by the three biggest opposition parties. A merger. We are talking about a primary of the APC to select their presidential candidate. Apart from being a merger NADD has the same political structure. It is also within its MOI for a primary.
“The biggest opposition party in Nigeria is APC, and the other parties who coalesced with them in 2015 accepted Buhari as the approved candidate of the biggest opposition party and therefore the legitimate candidate for any coalition involving the APC in line with international standards”
Why are you trying to defend the indefensible? Why do you try to justify and rationalize your own manufactured facts just to prove the illusion of a bigger opposition party leading a coalition?
My friend, where everything is clear there is nothing to clarify. The link I forwarded has a lot of information there, and it doesn’t escape your attention that the APC was formed by the opposition political parties named and a primary was held to select their presidential candidate. It is there in black and white with all their names and the results of the primary.
“By the way; the link you sent is about the recent presidential election, not an APC primary.'”
There is information about a primary being held by the APC. The people who contested in the primary and the results. .
Thanks
Reply
Rivers are agreed with all what you said here including the opposition alliance in Nigeria. General Buhari won’t have agreed to join the alliance with other smaller parties if they all want to be equal in delegates. His party being one the largest out of three bigger parties that starting the merger talks and coming second three times in the previous elections he was confidence that he can win the nomination with minimal efforts. He has name recognization, support in North and Southwest more that any of the potential candidates and they all accepted that and supporting his efforts to win the nomination. In The Gambia is the complete opposite because people like Bax and PDIOS said We are not going to help you to get presidency you have to do it on your own. They are very selfish, ignorant and childish in their behavior. If I cannot get it nobody will get it mindset. God help us Gambia.
Kamalo, you are not right. Buhari was the one who selected Yemi Osinbajor after winning the nomination. He was smart to know that in other to win the general elections he need to balance the ticket with another person from another region. Prof. Yemi came from Southwest which overwhelming went for him in this elections to win the presidency.
Gambia, UDP scared?? Are you serious??
Look, UDP is not going to entertain any idea of a primary or convention with any political party as long as it remains the biggest opposition party in the country because such calls are not based on any principle known to the world that we live in especially given that is already an established fact that UDP have been scoring more votes than all the other opposition parties combined.
Secondly, how many times does UDP have to proof that it is the party with the largest following? Is that not what all the presidential election results since 1996 have proven?
Thirdly, if pdois or any other party is still determined to overtake UDP in terms of numbers, they clearly have an opportunity to show what they are made of in a general election. What then is the fuss?? General elections are the arena in which different political parties contest for power and votes, not a primary. A primary is an internal instrument that individual parties use to select their own candidate or leader.
Thanks
Kamalo, you are unschooled. Go and find out what a “Merger” is, how it works and also its ramifications on the legal personalities involved.
Who told you Nadd is a merger and how and who made it a merger?? If you know what the Gambian laws says about merging political parties, you won’t dare calling Nadd a merger.
By the way;
1. The MOU that established Nadd created it as an Allaince of political parties and has described it as such all over.
2. After its clandestine registration with the IEC, the Supreme Court declared NADD as a political party.
3. Notwithstanding it’s new found status (a political party) it never was the biggest opposition party in the country as it trailed behind the UDP in the 2006 presidential election by 5:1
4. It only won one seat in the 2007 parliamentary elections compared to UDP’s 4.
5. Given the above, NADD therefore had no legitimacy to lead any coalition involving the UDP, which is the biggest opposition party in the country.
6. For the sake of clarity, there is no legal or political entity called a “Merger”. A merger is merely a process of joining one or more entities to form all whole new one so that the legal personalities of the parties to the merger becomes extinct or no longer existent.
7. The APC in Nigeria was born out of such a process to became an independent legal entity, a new registered political party, which subsumed the legal personalities of the parties associated with the merger.
8. APC’s status and legal personality is no different from any other political party in Nigeria.
9. In the case of Gambia, the law provides that a merger of political parties is only possible when the constitutions of the parties concerned provided for it. There is no political party in The Gambia whose constitution allows for a merger. Certainly not the UDP. That’s is why Nadd’s registration did not affect the legal existence of any of the parties.
10. NADD’s own MOU called it an Allaince.
11. The Supreme Court declared it as a political party
These are the facts and they won’t change just because some people don’t like it.
Thanks
In the UK, there was the Liberal Party and the Social Democrats. The two parties merged to form what is today known as “The Liberal Democrats” headed by Nick Clegg.
Going by Kamalo’s analogy in respect of the APC in Nigeria, I wonder what he will call the Liberal Democrats of UK.
Kamalo, is the Liberal Democrats in the UK a political party or not???? We know it to be a political party over here. Just wondering how you call it in your weird world of PDOIS politics.
Thanks
“Kamalo, you are not right. Buhari was the one who selected Yemi Osinbajor after winning the nomination. He was smart to know that in other to win the general elections he need to balance the ticket with another person from another region. Prof. Yemi came from Southwest which overwhelming went for him in this elections to win the presidency.”
Janjanbureh, points noted. I was quoting the report which stated that the APC chose Yemi Osinbajor as his running mate. I know in the US the candidate has the sole prerogative to choose his or her running mate.
Yes, demography and other voting factors are tactical considerations that can always be helpful. I agree with your observation.
“Rivers are agreed with all what you said here including the opposition alliance in Nigeria. General Buhari won’t have agreed to join the alliance with other smaller parties if they all want to be equal in delegates. His party being one the largest out of three bigger parties that starting the merger talks and coming second three times in the previous elections he was confidence that he can win the nomination with minimal efforts.”
Janjanbureh, you have to objectively look at the issues and then form an opinion based on what happened. What you are insinuating means that you know exactly what was going on in General Buhari’s mind. I am sure this is not the case.
The first point to note is that General Buhari’s political party agreed to join, not only in a coalition, but a merger with the other opposition political parties. Bear in mind that General Buhari has contested three times for the presidency on the platform of his political party. And despite the fact that his political party was the largest he could not win.
So what motivated General Buhari to join an alliance and to loose the independence of his political party in a merger is anyone’s guess. I am sure the least of his concerns was not that smaller parties should have equal delegates in a primary, but the fact that he agreed to the process of holding a primary to select the presidential candidate is the most fundamental outcome. It shows that he is true to his calling that he is a born-again democrat.
And this is how it is supposed to be. I am sure he would have conceded gracefully if others have won the primary. The fact that he has the largest party, his name recognition and his previous participation in other elections helped his candidacy but I am incline to believe that they are not the only determining factors. What is important to note is the process. A process of holding a primary to select the presidential candidate.
“…In The Gambia is the complete opposite because people like Bax and PDIOS said We are not going to help you to get presidency you have to do it on your own. They are very selfish, ignorant and childish in their behavior. If I cannot get it nobody will get it mindset. God help us Gambia.”
I don’t think this is a fair and accurate statement. You are misrepresenting the position of PDOIS. It surprises me though because all their statements regarding coalition with other opposition political parties is a matter of public knowledge.
Lafia. before you go bonkers about merger. If I said anything that connotes NADD as a merger be assured that it was an unintentional mistake. It meant to say that apart from APC being a merger it has the same political structure as NADD. Of course I know that NADD is not a merger. An innocent mistake if it comes out to the contrary. I will comment on your other points later.
So what is APC, a political party or an alliance/coalition??? Just wondering how you call it in your weird world of PDOIS Politics.
By the way, the MOU that provided the basis of founding NADD created it as an alliance. The is what it’s Preamble says;
“We, the undersigned representatives of opposition political parties who seek to establish an alliance…….’’
This is what Article 1 of the same MOU said;
“An alliance is hereby established. The name of the alliance is National Alliance for Democracy and Development with the acronym [NADD].’’-
Thanks
“We are talking about a primary of the APC to select their presidential Candidate. APART FROM BEING A MEGER NADD HAS THE SAME POLITICAL STRUCTURE.”
Lafia, the second part of this statement in bold letters is poorly stated, and thus creates the impression that NADD is a merger. It is an unintentional mistake. It should read, “apart from the APC being a merger NADD has the same political structure.” I hope it is clear this time around.
What I intended to do was to make a comparison between the APC and NADD. I have seen your statements in the other “topic” where you are arguing with Bax about the nature of NADD as an alliance versus a political party.
What you are failing to understand is that NADD has been deliberately constructed to serve as an alliance, but at the same time can uniquely and independently stand as a political structure representing its constituent parts, thus giving it the legitimacy as a political party to be registered with the independent Electoral Commission. This is why the Supreme Court ruled that NADD was a political party, and the IEC registered it as such.
When the Supreme Court ruled that NADD was a political party, it doesn’t matter whether in its Memorandum of Understanding its was stated that it is an alliance, but rather the nature of the political entity itself which fulfills all the requirements of a political party. Thus the Supreme Court did not differentiate between NADD as a alliance or its essence as a political party. It is one and the same. If NADD is registered as a alliance it is a political party, and if it is registered as a political party it is an alliance. It is one with two sides of the same coin. This is my layman understanding of its legal perspective.
The Alliance construct of NADD is more political. And this is evident in its preamble. That is all the things that NADD as an alliance wanted and envisaged to do. This is obvious given that you have different political parties with different platforms and agendas, and the only way you can harmonize their aims and objectives is to identify a common goal and aspirations. The preamble reads more like the American Declaration of Independence, and justifiably so because the intent of the Alliance was to create a new political dispensation.
Coming back to the issue between NADD and the APC. NADD was registered by the IEC, and the APC was registered by the INEC (the independent national electoral commission.). One was an alliance and the other a merger. However, the political structure of both the APC and NADD are the same. Both entities are formed as a result of the alliances of different opposition political parties. This is the first point to note.
Secondly, we have to underscore the reason why the opposition political parties in Nigeria ( who are part of the APC) decided to create a merger, and why the opposition political parties in the Gambia decided to form an alliance.
The fundamental truth in both instances is that none of the political parties, either in Nigeria or the Gambia, can win a presidential election outright on their own against the incumbent government. The ANPP twice under Buhari; and the CPC once under Buhari cannot do so. And the UDP, the largest opposition party in the Gambia ( in terms of the opposition vote count} cannot do so either. Hence the need for a merger in the case of the Nigerian opposition parties, and the need for an alliance in the case of the Gambian opposition. This is the second point to note.
NB: Will continue separately due to the length of this write up. And Lafia, you need not go to a law school to understand the fundamental and basic principles of law. The internet is a school where you can access any information you need be it on law or any other discipline.
,
What happened after the new opposition political restructuring in Nigeria, the creation of the APC as a political party, and in the Gambia the formation of NADD as an alliance of opposition political parties?
The ANPP tried twice under General Buhari and the CPC tried once under General Buhari to win the Nigerian presidency but failed. They are among the biggest opposition political parties in Nigeria. When they formed a merger with the other opposition political parties and created the APC, they won the presidency this past election cycle. The first time an opposition political party win a presidential election in Nigeria’s checkered political history.
The UDP under Lawyer Ousainou Darbo tried three times to win the Gambian presidency on its own, and under its various other party-led alliances but failed. The UDP is regarded as the biggest opposition party in the country.
When it joined an alliance with the other opposition parties in 2006 and NADD was created, there were all indications that NADD was poised to be the Gambia’s APC. NADD won a bye-election and was winning the confidence of the electorate that it can defeat the status quo. Like a thunderbolt from nowhere the UDP pulled out of the alliance.
People like Lafia were pedaling the false notion that UDP should not be part of an alliance, but should rather be leading one as the biggest opposition party. They developed an agenda based on a party-led alliance and promise that when they win the election they will form a coalition government. They have led such alliances with the PPP, the NRP and the GMC but after twenty years they still cannot win the presidency. And even if they should win they cannot form a coalition government as promised. They can only form their own government. This is the sad reality of the Gambian political situation.
After twenty years, Lafia is still arguing that UDP is the biggest opposition political party and should lead other opposition political parties in any kind of alliance. We have been going back and forth on this issue election cycle after election cycle for twenty years now.
We have always argued that UDP being the biggest opposition party is inconsequential as long it cannot win an election outright on its own. The ANPP and CPC statuses as leading opposition political parties in Nigeria was inconsequential as long as they could not have won the Nigerian presidency. So Lafia’s arguments are redundant and he will be making these arguments until the next election cycle after 2016.
Now it is just a question of waiting to see what the UDP will do. Lafia has already stake out their position. We as political observers will patiently wait to see how the opposition political parties are going to deal with the Gambian opposition problem.
And by the way UDP should watch their back. The P.P.P. is coming back and with a charismatic and popular leader as OJ, they can win back most of the people they have lost to the UDP. Both parties share the same voter constituency. If the PPP diehards in the UDP should decide to go home now that their party is becoming vibrant and strong, then the UDP should start thinking about their biggest opposition party status.
I saw the clip of the PPP rally in Brikama the other day with someone wearing a t-shirt with the picture of the former president. A very strong signal. May be OJ can pull this off.
Kamalo, your rambling is too incendiary to read especially when you compare NADD with APC.
Firstly, yes APC is a by-product of a merger, NADD was not a merger or a by-product of a merger. You admitted this yourself.
Secondly, the MOU that established NADD created it as an Allaince of political parties. The APC was created as a political party just like the Liberal Democrats in the UK.
Thirdly, the parties which created NADD remained existing legal entities. In the case of the APC, the legal personalities involved became subsumed and non-existent.
So where is the comparison here?? Or are you telling us that the APC is not a political party but an alliance?? I wonder what you will call the Liberal Democrats in the UK.
I have already informed you that a merger is just a process of fusing two or more legal entities to form a whole new legal entity. In politics, that whole new legal entity is still called a political party. There is no legal entity in politics that is known as a merger. Go back to school
Thanks
“After twenty years, Lafia is still arguing that UDP is the biggest opposition political party and should lead other opposition political parties in any kind of alliance.”- Kamalo
I anticipate UDP to continue making this argument as long as it remains the biggest opposition party in the country and regardless of what anybody says.
We already know the amount of hatred some opposition figures have for UDP but no one within the UDP is bothered about that. The UDP will always insist that any coalition involving the party are formed on the basis of principles known to coalition politics in the world over. And that is regardless of the strong personal dislikes coming from PDOIS leaders notably Halifa Sallah.
People must not continue to delude themselves.
Thanks
“Kamalo, your rambling is too incendiary to read especially when you compare NADD with APC.”
It would have been more appropriate and instructive if you give us the reasons why NADD cannot be compared with the APC.
I am not trying to put a wedge between the UDP and PPP if that is what you mean by incendiary. I was just making an observation which I found to be valid.
I read on facebook the contributions made by the new faces of the PPP, some of whom were former UDP supporters by their own admission and their zeal, commitment and utmost desire to take the PPP to the next level was quite palpable. It matches your own zeal and commitment for the UDP.
Also, OJ is just formidable. The determination that is inherent in him to revive and sustain the PPP is noteworthy. You can now understand the basis why I made those remarks.
“Firstly, yes APC is a by-product of a merger, NADD was not a merger or a by-product of a merger. You admitted this yourself.”
What is your point? Yes, APC is a merger. This has never been in dispute. NADD is not a merger. This also has never been in dispute.
“Secondly, the MOU that established NADD created it as an Allaince of political parties. The APC was created as a political party just like the Liberal Democrats in the UK.”
The MOU established NADD as an alliance which it is. The Supreme Court ruled that NADD is a political party which it was. Therefore I could not see your point of contention or disagreement.
The APC is a political party as a result of a merger. What therefore are you trying to proof? That NADD is not an alliance? That NADD was not a political party?
The Supreme Court did not rule that NADD is not an alliance. It ruled that NADD was a political party; it had an emblem, a motto and all the other characteristic features of a political party the reason why it was registered as a political party. This also was the intent of the Alliance to create an independent political structure (a party} to represent the interest of its constituent members.
“Thirdly, the parties which created NADD remained existing legal entities. In the case of the APC, the legal personalities involved became subsumed and non-existent.”
Yes, the existence of NADD did not abrogate their legal standing as independent political parties. They were never parties to a merger. They were parties to an alliance. An alliance is a political construct; a political arrangement between independent political parties.
The APC is a merger, and in this case the entities and personalities to the merger would be subsumed to the new entity that is created. A brand new political party. This means all the parties to the merger remain non-existent. I am still at a lost to the point you are trying to make.
“So where is the comparison here?? Or are you telling us that the APC is not a political party but an alliance?? I wonder what you will call the Liberal Democrats in the UK.”
I was comparing the APC which is a political party created as a result of a merger of opposition political parties. And NADD a registered political party created as a result of an alliance of opposition political parties. The Liberal Democrats in the UK are called the Liberal Democrats. What do you want me to call them?
“I have already informed you that a merger is just a process of fusing two or more legal entities to form a whole new legal entity.”
The meaning of a merger has never been in dispute. And the political parties that are party to a merger have never been in dispute either. So we have a case here where you are arguing with yourself.
“In politics, that whole new legal entity is still called a political party. There is no legal entity in politics that is known as a merger.”
Nobody is arguing against what you wrote. You created your own argument and argues against it. Does that makes sense? You asked me.
Go back to school
Thanks
Reply
Kamalo: Everything you are saying is understood by Lafia. It is a common knowledge that no political entity can contest elections in the Gambia without being registered with the IEC. Since there is no law as to how an alliance can be formed, Gambia’s opposition parties decided to register their alliance as a party which is just a tactical move to form a formidable political entity to contest the 2006 presidential election.
UDP cannot say they do not know or subscribe to it since they are part and parcel of everything and even went and appended their signature to it and even went as far as to stand under its banner to contest a by-election which was secured.
Why should it bother them or anyone whether NADD is called a party, alliance or a merger as long as it is serving the tactical objective for which it is intended?
If there is a second round of voting, there would not be any need for parties to go into such an arrangement, so we all know the reason why they have decided to create this form of coming together. It simply means those who are opposed to the registration of NADD with the IEC are those who are opposed to NADD as an entity to contest elections, which goes to show that such people are indirectly serving the interest of the ruling APRC within the ranks of the opposition.
As far as the Convention or Primary arrangement is concerned, Mr. Darbo would have been chosen as the Flag-bearer of the United Front which would have been more credible for him and the rest of the opposition and provide better chance for changing the country because of its credibility in the eyes of the world and voters. But may be advisers like lawyer Lafia must have misled him to refuse to participate in such a democratic method.
Hopefully this time around the UDP will look for better advisers who might encourage it to partake in such a proactive method for the interest of the nation and democracy and credible process.
Who know, May be Nigerians have read the NADD MoU and implemented it to serve their interest.
Thanks
“The MOU established NADD as an alliance which it is. The Supreme Court ruled that NADD is a political party which it was. Therefore I could not see your point of contention or disagreement.The MOU established NADD as an alliance which it is. The Supreme Court ruled that NADD is a political party which it was. Therefore I could not see your point of contention or disagreement.”- Kamalo
This shows that you are ignorant. There was an intervening event which too place in respect of NADD and its called “The registration”. This was not envisaged under the MOU which established NADD and its was this intervening event that resulted to the supreme court declaring it as a political party.
The Supreme Court declaration was not based on the construction or interpretation of the MOU that established NADD and therefore did not change the intention of the signatories thereunder to create an alliance.
It is the law that REQUIRES that the IEC only register political parties for the purpose of contesting and sponsoring candidates in public elections. NADD’s registration with the IEC was a fraud perpetrated by PDOIS and Halifa Sallah and in violation of the MOU that established NADD particularly Article 10. So clearly, NADD as not a political party created as a result of an alliance of political parties. NADD was ONLY a political party FRAUDULENTLY created by Halifa Sallah against all advice and in violation of the MOU that founded NADD.
Despite its party status which was obtained through fraud and not in accordance with the MOU, NADD was never the biggest opposition party in the country unlike the APC in Nigeria, and therefore had no legitimacy to lead the UDP in any coalition or political arrangement of any sort;
1. NADD trailed behind the UDP in the 2006 presidential election by 5:1
2. NADD only won one seat in the 2007 parliamentary elections compared to UDP’s 4.
5. Given all the above, NADD therefore had no legitimacy to lead any coalition involving the UDP, which is the biggest opposition party in the country.
These are the facts and they won’t change just because you don’t like it. Go back to school.
Thanks
Lafia,When we say NADD we mean UDP included which cannot be lesser than the UDP since UDP was a signatory to the NADD MoU. Kemeseng who was a member of the UDP also contested under NADD in the subsequent by-election after the Supreme court declared it a merger and declared their seats vacant.
There is no doubt that NADD loses its support base after the NRP and UDP decided to withdraw from it. No one will argue with you on that.
There is also no excuse to say that UDP is biggest and therefore no need to go into primaries. Since UDP is sure that it is the biggest and most powerful it should simply go into the ring and show it like Buhari, to not only do it but be seen to have done it. Only then would it be justified to attack PDOIS should it refuse to give support to it. But at this stage it is too late for Lafia’s hammer to hit PDOIS and now UDP has no one to blame for its lack of success.
For all i know PDOIS has been very systematic in its approach to coalition building which it can defend for all times based on the circumstances that prevail in Gambia.
UDP did pull out of NADD. Therefore, NADD does not include UDP. As a matter of fact, UDP is bigger than NADD and this has been proven in the 2006 presidential election.
Thanks
By the way, Buhari’s primary was done within the framework of a single political party which he belongs to. How many times do you want to be reminded of that??
Thanks
So clearly, NADD was not a political party created as a result of an alliance of political parties or the MOU that founded it. It became a political party through fraud and still fall behind UDP in terms of size as proven in the 2006 presidential election.
Thanks
Lafia, your position is understood, arguing for the sake of actually saying nothing. Whether At what stage did the UDP pull out of NADD? The issue is UDP signed the NADD MoU and was part of it even after it was registered as a party and even after seats were declared vacant up to the time they started talking about Flag-bearer when Darbo left giving the impression that it was leadership problem which motivated him to leave which is incorrect. Tell the readers why the UDP left NADD and don’t bother us about tactics of registration which UDP has accepted since day one. Who told you it was Halifa who registered NADD? and who informed you that NADD was going to lead UDP in a coalition? How could NADD lead UDP when UDP is signatory party within the NADD framework? Are you afraid to tell the readers the reason why your party left NADD? Is that what the UDP told you or are just fabricating your own stuff?
I’m sure no one told you what you are saying. Just because you have the ability to use the key board at your disposal should not motivate you to slander against others. We can all do that but it is not decency.
Lafia Touray la Manju
April 6, 2015 at 10:36 AM
“The MOU established NADD as an alliance which it is. The Supreme Court ruled that NADD is a political party which it was. Therefore I could not see your point of contention or disagreement.The MOU established NADD as an alliance which it is. The Supreme Court ruled that NADD is a political party which it was. Therefore I could not see your point of contention or disagreement.”- Kamalo
“This shows that you are ignorant. There was an intervening event which too place in respect of NADD and its called “The registration”. This was not envisaged under the MOU which established NADD and its was this intervening event that resulted to the supreme court declaring it as a political party.”
What you said above didn’t change any of the facts I have also stated. NADD was registered. How was it registered is the question at issue. Was it registered as an alliance or was it registered as a political party?
As Yerro Bah intimated there is no law that govern the formation of an alliance. But there is a law that govern the formation of a political party. And it is only political parties that can be registered with the IEC and can sponsor candidates for election. Therefore the opposition political parties decided to register their alliance as a party.
The Supreme Court decision notwithstanding, the takeaway is that NADD was registered and was able to contest and sponsor candidates. And up until the time after the Supreme Court decision the UDP was part of the Alliance, and as Yerro Bah intimated to us stand under its banner and contested a bye-election that was won. So what is all the fuss about?
“The Supreme Court declaration was not based on the construction or interpretation of the MOU that established NADD and therefore did not change the intention of the signatories thereunder to create an alliance.'”
This is why I said earlier that the Supreme Court did not rule that NADD is not an alliance. It only ruled that NADD is a political party.
“It is the law that REQUIRES that the IEC only register political parties for the purpose of contesting and sponsoring candidates in public elections.”
And this is the reason why the opposition political parties decided to register their alliance as a party.
.
” NADD’s registration with the IEC was a fraud perpetrated by PDOIS and Halifa Sallah and in violation of the MOU that established NADD particularly Article 10.”
So NADD was registered with the IEC. It also fulfills the requirement of ” contesting and sponsoring candidates in public elections.” How then can it be a fraud?
And how also did it violate the MOU that establish NADD? Was NADD not formed so that it can be registerable with the IEC to contest and sponsor candidates in public elections?
” So clearly, NADD as not a political party created as a result of an alliance of political parties. NADD was ONLY a political party FRAUDULENTLY created by Halifa Sallah against all advice and in violation of the MOU that founded NADD.”
Where were the lawyers in the room when Halifa Sallah was fraudulently creating and registering NADD as a political party? When all this process was going on the UDP was part of it. They only left when it was time for the primaries.
“Despite its party status which was obtained through fraud and not in accordance with the MOU, NADD was never the biggest opposition party in the country unlike the APC in Nigeria, and therefore had no legitimacy to lead the UDP in any coalition or political arrangement of any sort;”
The APC was formed in anticipation of the 2015 Nigerian elections. It was a merger of the three leading opposition parties and others. Its bigger opposition party status is the result of a merger.
NADD was formed as a result of an alliance between Gambian opposition political parties including the UDP. Its bigger opposition status is the result of an alliance in which the UDP was a part of.
NADD cannot lead UDP in an alliance because UDP was already part of the alliance (coalition). And NADD did not seek to lead UDP in any coalition after UDP left the alliance.
1. NADD trailed behind the UDP in the 2006 presidential election by 5:1 (Did UDP win the presidential election?)
2. NADD only won one seat in the 2007 parliamentary elections compared to UDP’s 4.{ Did the UDP have the majority seats in parliament?)
5. Given all the above, NADD therefore had no legitimacy to lead any coalition involving the UDP, which is the biggest opposition party in the country. (“Did NADD Seek to lead a coalition involving the UDP?)
And did anyone dispute that UDP is the biggest opposition party in terms of the opposition vote? The answer to all these questions is in the negative. Therefore you are only speaking to the gallery or the choir. Continue to do so at some point it will become monotonous.
These are the facts and they won’t change just because you don’t like it. Go back to school.
Thanks
As soon as NADD was registered, the UDP leader told them the UDP was going to consider its position and membership of the organisation and that is exactly what they did.
The UDP invoked internal procedures within the party and that process concluded that it was right and best for the party to pull out given all that has transpired within NADD.
UDP believe and adheres to due process and that means sometimes it will take a while before a decision can be reached on certain issues.
For the purpose of this debate and clarity, what is abundantly clear is that UDP is not part of NADD and that it is bigger than NADD. Plain and simply truth.
Thanks
“As soon as NADD was registered, the UDP leader told them the UDP was going to consider its position and membership of the organisation and that is exactly what they did,” Lafia.
Lafia, that is not exactly what they did. They maintained their position in NADD and launched it with all other parties at Palm Groove and together held a rally at Buffer Zone to declare to all Gambians and the world that they all belonged to NADD and that they would tour the country and hold rallies across the country to inform people about its launching and objectives.They also earlier participated in the By-election and fielded Kemeseng Jammeh under NADD. It was only when discussion started on leadership on the second day only when Darbo brought a letter along to say that they were going to their party because they cannot be in two parties since NADD is a political party and UDP is also a party. This gave the impression to the members and supporters that it was because of leadership squabbles which motivated its withdrawal which was definitely not the case.
Let me add that it was precisely those so-called internal procedures calling on members from across the country and asking them whether they should still go along with NADD if Darbo was not selected to which the members who did not know the head or tail of it simply chorused ‘No’! which UDP used as a justification and or mandate to withdraw when obviously it was already a pre-planned move to disintegrate NADD. This was why the UDP said they were going to win any way if all the Fulas and Mandinkas voted for them since a so-called fula/mandinka parties have formed a new coalition, NRP/UDP. It is also where all these lies emanated about Halifa disliking Darbo because of Mandinka ethnicity which Lafia is still propagating as truth to baffle the innocent even though it is not adding up.
This is why i said you cannot use the registration of NADD as a scapegoat and please look for something else. This one is defunct and cheap, too cheap an excuse.
Cheers